Why isn't every 4x fan playing Distant Worlds?

[BlueTemplar]

Your computer only needs to render what is shown on the screen, by definition.

You might be interested by this discussion about the computing limits of 4X games :
http://steamcommunity.com/groups/explor ... 8290981793

[LordMM]

ORIGINAL: BlueTemplar

Your computer only needs to render what is shown on the screen, by definition.

You might be interested by this discussion about the computing limits of 4X games :

Will there be a time delay while zooming in ? OR will this be seamless, Or will it be like Stellaris , where the Galaxy map is different from the system Map ? I like how things work in Distant worlds were everything is seamless, zooming in and out....

Just imagining 3d Stations with freighters actually docking in and out of your space station makes me crazy....

[Bingeling]

Every 3D application in a somewhat complex "world" has to take care of "what to draw". You wary details with distance, you ignore obstructed stuff. This should have been a main challenge in 3D since the earliest experiments.

So without every studying this myself, I assume that tools these days have quite a lot of support for this. I assume it is somewhat quite as simple as "unless zoomed withing distance X, ignore all contents of this system". Which makes 3d objects inside all systems but one not-drawn. And then add some other mechanisms for unit markers Distant Worlds style.

Seamless zooming should not be a major challenge, 3d games deal with that all the time (scrolling, zooming, popping in and out of view).

[BlueTemplar]

Star Ruler 2 has seamless zooming, check it out :
https://www.gog.com/game/star_ruler_2

In a slightly different genre, games with (more or less) seamless transitions :
Sins of a Solar Empire
Homeworld 1, Cataclysm, and 2 :
https://www.gog.com/game/homeworld_rema ... collection
Spring engine games, like Zero-K :
http://zero-k.info/

P.S.: check also Level of Detail :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_of_detail

[Colwolf77]

Some interesting debate going on in regards to use of graphics in 4x games. I've been playing the new game from Paradox 'Stellaris' now since release and although it does have a long way to go in regards to updates and fixes I can see the vision that the developers had when creating the game. On their forums a common issue which has been brought up is the lack of detail in regards to the public sector. Distant Worlds has been mentioned as a great example of an immersive public sector system and that Stellaris would benefit in taking inspiration from it.

I too think this is one of Distant Worlds greatest strengths and is one of the prime reasons it's seen as superior to other 4x games. I can imagine what the public sector would look like utilising a graphics engine like the one in Stellaris and think it would be beautiful. I know this could be seen as very graphically intensive but I believe with recent developments in graphics card tech that it wouldn't be unrealistic to pull off in the near future.

[Japhet]

On a list of changes and improvements I would like for the DW 2, 3d is pretty much the lowest next to multiplayer really. I just don't think it would add much gameplay-wise, beside making the game looking prettier.

One of the more popular Stellaris mods is the 2d Galaxy mod. Why? Because it removes the confusion when it comes to planets and empire borders.

Also, switching to 3d limits the game's mod potential. In 3d, you need actual models for ships, planets, etc. In 2d? just use the countless top-down pics of said things you can find on the internet and done.

[McUH]

Been playing games since the 8-bit era and 4x strategy are my favourites. Yet, I purchased DW:U approx. 1 year ago and started first game last week. Why?

1. Didn't even know that it exists.
2. It's real time. We old-timers grew up on excellent turn based 4x and I still prefer those (but for combat with big fleets real time is Ok).
3. Very basic graphics and sound. This in itself is not a stop (e.g. I still enjoy SE4), but is quite relevant with point 4.
4. Price. 5+ year old game with basic graphics when there are many other options today. When I first considered DW:U, I instead bought for $20 all of these: Stardrive, Horizon, SOTS2, SE5 and later added for about $10 Star ruler 2. So 5 decent-good 4x space strategy games for less than DW:U (maybe even when it's on sale).

At the end it didn't stop me, and I don't regret, it looks promising so far. But I think it will stop many others, especially point 4. We don't live in Age of Shadows any more so it isn't like old times when you either got MoO/2 (which to this day is still excellent) or don't play 4x in space.

That being said, DW:U is not the only game with this syndrome. Another excellent 4x with almost exactly same symptoms is Dominions 4.

Since graphics was mentioned in the thread, let me add: It is true that simple is good enough for game like this and might be even preferable for performance and clean interface. On the other hand it lacks immersion. When someone bombards my colony in DW:U, I might not even notice it, only later to find out the quality of the planet decreased, it is just another pop-up. When I play battle in SOTS2, I'm really there on the battlefield, feeling the pain of my colony being wiped out from the orbit just before my eyes. When I set galaxy completely against me, and played turn by turn just for mere survival, it really was like in the Babylon 5 pilot movie: "When they run out of dreadnoughts, they used cruisers. When they had no more cruisers, the supply ships ambushed us. When the tankers were destroyed, they deployed constructor between us and their planet. They were magnificent." No other 4x game ever made me feel like I'm really there. But DW:U is great for what it is too.

[Japhet]

SOTS2? Is that game even playable? [:'(] The thing is, there are several approaches to a 4x space game and the SotS is very different than Distant Worlds. Its primary focus are the space battles and, to a lesser degree, designing your ships. Research, colony management,diplomacy, economy is pretty much non-existent and serves no other purpose than making the space battles possible. It is closer to a strategy game like Sins of a Solar Empire than 4x game, imho. Also, it is turm based and the battles and bombardements happen on a battle map, not the galaxy map.

I love the first SotS, but what got me into DW was the fact that it was the only 4x that could replicate the actual vastness of space and the feeling of a living, breathing universe. With the high degree of automatization and the private sector, it also gives you the feeling that you are in fact the head of a space state with all restrictions and limitations that an actual politician would have, not some omnipotent entity that can control and influence every aspect of an empire directly (like in MoO2, GalacCiv, Endless Space, etc.). The point is, DW feels more like a simulation kind of game. And for that 2d graphics are absolutely sufficient.

Btw, totally agree on Dominions 4!

[McUH]

I entered SOTS2 when all was finished, for me it runs well. Multiplayer probably has problems but I don't do that in 4x. Similar to DW:U which is far from polished itself. Research is actually better in SOTS2 - tree is big and interesting, most of tech brings something new and unique to the game (new ship section, class, defensive asset, weapon - which are truly different in mechanics, not just numbers, various shields and armors also varying in mechanics from each other + other standard stuff like development/spy/control etc.). In DW:U tech is unfortunately quite uninspiring, mostly just adding number to something you have almost from the start (like +50, +70, +100, ...). Yes, economy is mostly internal but works. Colony management very basic, but deploying/using defensive assets in solar system is complex and fun. Diplomacy yes, weak and hard to understand, but I managed allied victory once . Biggest weakness is the AI, which can provide challenge only if you give it huge head start. On the other hand the random encounters (spectres, neutron star, pirate ghost ship...) are pretty nasty so when I encountered silver mist in DW:U I was like "Is that all you can do?" And then there are Grand menaces where the "Grand" is really not a joke . Sins is completely different and very simple in comparison - fun for what it is but not really 4x.

But I didn't mean to compare SOTS2 to DW:U, it is like chess and Go, both are great but different. Chess (SOTS2) has much more tactics but strategy is still very important. DW:U (Go) is mostly about strategy, but you can't ignore tactics too.

"vastness of space" in fact, DW:U has the same flaw as all other real time 4x I tried. You can move anywhere in the map pretty soon, almost from the beginning (gerax hyperdrive is fast enough and no problem packing fuel cells to traverse full galaxy and back). So it is not really vast, it is just crowded. This might be good from gameplay perspective but I like something based on logistic, so if you want to fly far from your empire you have to research some advanced tech (like very late game thorium fuel cells in MoO2) or make chain of resupply stations which can be targeted. I agree that DW:U is best sci-fi simulation I know - and for this alone, it is great achievement.

[Bingeling]

The vastness in the game is pretty good if you refrain from adding 10 more fuel cells to the design.

I remember having seen what I interpret as "The galaxy is too small. I triple the amount of fuel cells, steal the ultimate fuel cell racial tech, and there is no size to this at all!".

[Damiac]

Well, if the game is designed so it's trivial to design capable warships that can go back and forth across the galaxy 5 times on one fill up, then you shouldn't act surprised that people do that, and complain about how small it is. Although I think travel time is more significant than fuel limitations, and even at max tech it does take a bit of time for a ship to traverse a 10x10 galaxy.


Fuel tanks are far too small, I think this is the heart of that problem. I don't lose much offensive or defensive power by doubling my fuel tanks. In fact, since the default designs generally aren't using the full size available, I can add those fuel tanks and sacrifice nothing, except my ships take a trivial amount more cash, and take a trivial amount more time to produce. If fuel tanks were 5x their current size, suddenly a ship that can traverse the whole galaxy needs to make significant sacrifices in offense or defense.

[Lucian]

ORIGINAL: Damiac

Well, if the game is designed so it's trivial to design capable warships that can go back and forth across the galaxy 5 times on one fill up, then you shouldn't act surprised that people do that, and complain about how small it is. Although I think travel time is more significant than fuel limitations, and even at max tech it does take a bit of time for a ship to traverse a 10x10 galaxy.

This! ^^ To me, travel time is far more relevant in accurately portraying a "large" galaxy than fuel range. A 10x10 galaxy still seems huge, fuel range or no fuel range because it takes so long to traverse.

[BlueTemplar]

Considering the simulation speed is left at your discretion, "long" compared to what?

[Lucian]

ORIGINAL: BlueTemplar

Considering the simulation speed is left at your discretion, "long" compared to what?

I normally limit simulation speed to a level where important new messages do NOT closely resemble rapid machine gun fire. If the game reaches that sorry stage (which it can easily do, even at slow speeds on a huge galaxy) I feel that it has become pretty much unplayable, one of the few critical faults in this otherwise fine game.

So to answer your question, "long" compared to the point that the game becomes a frantic, completely unplayable cluster f**k due to simulation speed breaking the game design.

[BlueTemplar]

This seems more like a rant than an argument.
I was thinking more about comparing it to other gameplay features, like the double-growth time of planetary population, or the time it takes to build ships...

[Lucian]

ORIGINAL: BlueTemplar

This seems more like a rant than an argument.

Well however it might seem it was an accurate and honest response to your question. To me, simulation speed in DW is NOT entirely at your discretion because the game design essentially breaks if you turn it up too high. Simple as that.

[McUH]

For warships I think it is more or less Ok. Since you need shields/armor/weapons it takes some time before you can pack lot of fuel on them and even then it is some trade-off. The problem is scout ship which really only needs one engine, one warp, not much in shields/armor and just pack it with fuel cells. Then you make contact with someone on the other side of galaxy and can do espionage/diplomacy/whatever, which is quite unrealistic (even for games I think).

Some games approach this with effective communication range, which you can increase by tech or by building relay stations. This keeps operational range more in check and can even lead to loss of contact after loss of key planet or communication relay. So you can still pack ships with fuel to keep them going for long, but you can't send them too far away as you don't have efficient way to communicate. Or you might possibly send them on automated mission, but once outside of communication range you don't see the ship any more and can't issue/change orders. If it returns someday it brings whatever information it gathered, or it might get destroyed/stranded and you might never find out. Like we can send probes outside of our solar system, but once we lose communication they are lost for us.

Considering the simulation speed is left at your discretion, "long" compared to what?

I think it is still pretty fast comparing to other in-game events (how much does it take to construct station, research tech etc.). Early game crossing of galaxy should not be possible (except for something like wormhole). Mid game it should still take considerable effort like designing ship for exactly this purpose. Late game it should be fairly easy to allow wrapping up efficiently.

[BlueTemplar]

ORIGINAL: Japhet
Also, switching to 3d limits the game's mod potential. In 3d, you need actual models for ships, planets, etc. In 2d? just use the countless top-down pics of said things you can find on the internet and done.

It's not like there isn't plenty of 3D models that one can "borrow".
Compare the Space Empire 4 (2D) and 5 (3D) shipsets for instance :
http://spaceempires.net/downloads.html
Sure there are more SE4 2D shipsets, but I think that's due more to the overall quality of the game... which might be more of a problem for 3D... (but not nearly as much as 10 years ago!)

[fmonster]

I have read through this whole thread and was surprised at the robust debate as well as the information shared by this group. Very nice to see!

I will pitch in my two cents.

I will start by stating that I have yet to purchase this game and am currently lurking here to see all the ins and outs for possible future purchase. As an old timer myself, I usually lean toward turn-based strategy games as a practice. Pausible real-time is acceptable as secondary choice. So, this title fits that. I prefer 2D to 3D, but either way, nice visuals do help with immersion but are not high on my list. Again, check for this game. Good gaming is my most important factor, and from what I have read here and in other places, this fits the bill very well!

Now the stumbling block. While I like to support developers and their titles, I do draw the line at some prices. Sixty American Dollars is just too steep to pull the trigger here. If I love a game, I have little problem purchasing the game multiple times as the years go by,... heck, I just bought all of the MOO's again this past week for the umpteenth time, but for a 5 year old game it is just too much. I completely understand the niche category that this game resides in, but even in that group, especially when it is on Steam and can be compared to all the other 4X titles, this one is going to be hard to "give it a try" at current price.

All-in-all, I look forward to the day when I can pull the trigger on this game and dive in to what looks to be a fantastic title, but until that day, there are other 4X games to try that do not cost 1/3 of what this does. And while they might not be as good, I can give 3 games a shot at the stated rate as compared to a single copy of this.

[BlueTemplar]

While trying the game before buying it might be complicated for 4X games, it can still be done.

Also, Matrix/Slitherine games are now regularly discounted (something that was not even thinkable a few years ago).